Why impeachment media coverage would likely be a disaster

CNN / YouTube White House releases details on Trump 1541594015.jpg...
Donald Trump CNN / YouTube

Last week, former special counsel Robert Mueller’s congressional testimony confirmed once again that Donald Trump has engaged in serious wrongdoing, including likely obstruction of justice. It also raised the possibility that Trump could be charged with crimes after he leaves office. Mueller’s testimony on Wednesday also provided something of a preview for what possible impeachment hearings might look like, as Democrats in the House continue to weigh that option.

For Democrats, part of the allure of launching impeachment is the chance to use the public forum to educate Americans about the level of corruption and lawbreaking that surrounds the Trump White House. Pointing to how Watergate hearings helped turn the tide against President Richard Nixon in 1973 and 1974, impeachment advocates argue that the glare of the media spotlight could sway public opinion.

But I fear that might not be the case. With a D.C. press corps that has internalized Trump’s view of reality TV politics, not to mention the influence of a billion-dollar conservative media industry set up to amplify GOP lies, the media’s impeachment coverage, unlike during Watergate, would be disastrously shallow and lean heavily in favor of Republicans, just as the Mueller coverage did last week.

Note that I am not suggesting that the heavy-handed and unprofessional way the D.C. press would likely cover impeachment hearings is a reason that Democrats should not push forward on the Hill: It is not a reason to back down. But I am saying that the press will act as a major counterforce to Democrats if they opt for impeachment and try to tell the truth about Trump to the American people.

In other words, if impeachment happens, it will be Democrats versus Republicans plus the press. Last week’s Mueller hearings made that painfully obvious, as journalists gleefully echoed GOP spin about what a supposed bust the event was.

The Mueller coverage represented part of a larger pattern of how the news media deals with high-profile congressional hearings. For three years under President Barack Obama, the media narrative was that Benghazi hearings could be a problem for Obama and Democrats. Then, when they inevitably were not, the press shrugged and waited for the next GOP production to materialize. This while Republicans were generally credited for applying relentless political pressure on the Democratic president. (So savvy!)

That was the exact pattern during six years of the mindless Bill Clinton hearings in the ‘90s, which started way before his affair with Monica Lewinsky was discovered. Back then, almost never did the press turn its focus on the GOP and suggest that its busted Whitewater hearings were a political problem. Yet with the two Mueller hearings last week, the press did that at the speed of sound. Within hours of their conclusion, the hammer came down on Democrats as journalists followed Trump’s lead and announced that the days’ events had been a “flop,” and that he had emerged the clear winner.

This is exactly what the press would do with any possible impeachment proceedings. Rather than let the story play out and let Democrats unfold a compelling narrative, journalists posing as theater critics would be issuing nasty reviews, urging the production be shut down. That’s what we saw last week.

“Lack of Electricity in Mueller Testimony Short-Circuits Impeachment,” The New York Times concluded last week, suggesting that “electricity” (?) is the key to possibly removing a sitting president from office. It was one of many theater criticism-type dispatches the Times published in the wake of the hearings, as the paper over and over-focused not on the substance—on Trump’s possible lawbreaking—of Mueller’s nearly seven hours of testimony, but on the so-called optics and on the entertainment value of the hearings. “The Blockbuster That Wasn’t: Mueller Disappoints the Democrats,” blared another Times headline, comparing the hearings to a summer movie release.

That misinformed approach was everywhere last week. Impeachment “took a blow on Wednesday when former Special Counsel Robert Mueller delivered muted and sometimes shaky testimony before two House panels,” Politico announced, reading directly off Republican talking points. Separately, a Politico news story last week matter-of-factly referred to the hearings as a “flop,” and insisted Democrats deemed the event a “disappointment,” even though Politico couldn’t actually find a single disappointed Democrat to quote.

Not only is that a superficial way to cover politics, but in the case of the Mueller hearings, the Times and others turned out to be dead wrong about the question of impeachment. Stressing that Mueller’s testimony was a bore, news outlets rushed to suggest he had buried any chance of impeachment. Yet in the days following the Mueller hearings, more Democratic members of Congress came out in favor of impeachment (the tally now sits at more than 100), and Democratic leaders informed a judge that they needed access to grand jury testimony because they’re “investigating whether to recommend articles of impeachment” against the president. Blinded by GOP spin, and obsessed with optics, the press missed the week’s big story: Mueller’s hearings had upped the chances of impeachment happening.

At times, the Mueller hearing coverage seemed to be told exclusively through the prism of the GOP. Here, from late Wednesday afternoon, is a sample of Washington Post headlines updating on the hearing:

  • “Republican leaders take a victory lap in wake of testimony”
  • “The reaction to Mueller’s testimony, outside the fundraiser in W.Va. where Trump is headed”
  • “Trump declares it a ‘very good day,’ calls Mueller investigation a ‘witch hunt’”
  • “RNC says ‘case closed’ after Mueller hearings”

Notice a trend?

Meanwhile, it was nearly impossible to find media coverage suggesting that the hearings had been a disappointment or failure for the GOP, whose members spent the entire day pestering Mueller about incoherent deep state conspiracy theories. Previously, Politico reported that GOP members would “lie in wait” for Mueller in hopes of exposing him as a fraud, which obviously never happened. But the press showed no interest scoring the Republican performance or grading it as a win or loss. Only the Democrats received a grade.

All of this, I fear, would apply to any impeachment coverage that might loom in the future.

 

Thank you to all who already support our work since we could not exist without your generosity. If you have not already, please consider supporting us on Patreon to ensure we can continue bringing you the best of independent journalism.

Leave a Comment

6 Comments on "Why impeachment media coverage would likely be a disaster"

avatar
  Subscribe  
newest oldest most voted
Notify of
Dee
Guest

This is not a good enough reason not to impeach or have the public view it.

Rowdy Girl
Guest
Rowdy Girl

Blah blah blah. I’ve been traumatized by this creep’s time in office and I want to SEE every minute of the impeachment hearings. I want to SEE him led away in handcuffs. I want to SEE him put on a boat and sent to Siberia! We grown ups can see through the childish ravings of the media and can sit through testimony and understand and discern truth in its glorious power as we witness this country rising from the ashes of Donald Trump’s effort to destroy us. We don’t have to listen to the fools!

Mick owens
Guest
Mick owens

Impeach the prick now!!!!!!!!

carol jay
Guest
carol jay

Muellers words spoke for themselves. GOP behavior and words spoke for them. It will be up to the dems to make sure the information about why he is being impeached gets out. It is not as though they have no way to do that. Despite what appears to be news media’s proclivity to go rightward on social media the words spoken that dya spoke for themselves, example: https://www.aol.com/article/news/2019/07/30/new-ad-highlights-mueller-testimony-as-impeachment-push-grows/23782690/

Charles isgrig
Guest
Charles isgrig

The problem I have with impeachment now is because we know the Senate will declare him innocent and sing his praises that’s when you come around to the election Trump and his cronies will just claim he’s been totally exonerated. I suggest we wait to start impeachment hearings sometime in the winter so that they’re still going on when the election starts. That’s keeping it on the front page and influencing the voters

carol jay
Guest
carol jay
Thats too late.to impeach while he would be running. not even sure if that allowed under the rules. doesnt matter what senate does. dont impeach he will crow as wqill godoaalparty see they couldnt even start impeachment cause no collusion no obstruction.. Fact is you may not recall with Nixon gop acted as it did now til the 18 minutes of tape once they saw that as one they told him resign or youll be impeached. so we have 2 routes if impeachment, one is to at least let House do it and 2 hope that finally one GOP will… Read more »